In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved:
nvmet: move async event work off nvmet-wq
For target nvmet_ctrl_free() flushes ctrl->async_event_work.
If nvmet_ctrl_free() runs on nvmet-wq, the flush re-enters workqueue
completion for the same worker:-
A. Async event work queued on nvmet-wq (prior to disconnect):
nvmet_execute_async_event()
queue_work(nvmet_wq, &ctrl->async_event_work)
nvmet_add_async_event()
queue_work(nvmet_wq, &ctrl->async_event_work)
B. Full pre-work chain (RDMA CM path):
nvmet_rdma_cm_handler()
nvmet_rdma_queue_disconnect()
__nvmet_rdma_queue_disconnect()
queue_work(nvmet_wq, &queue->release_work)
process_one_work()
lock((wq_completion)nvmet-wq) <--------- 1st
nvmet_rdma_release_queue_work()
C. Recursive path (same worker):
nvmet_rdma_release_queue_work()
nvmet_rdma_free_queue()
nvmet_sq_destroy()
nvmet_ctrl_put()
nvmet_ctrl_free()
flush_work(&ctrl->async_event_work)
__flush_work()
touch_wq_lockdep_map()
lock((wq_completion)nvmet-wq) <--------- 2nd
Lockdep splat:
============================================
WARNING: possible recursive locking detected
6.19.0-rc3nvme+ #14 Tainted: G N
--------------------------------------------
kworker/u192:42/44933 is trying to acquire lock:
ffff888118a00948 ((wq_completion)nvmet-wq){+.+.}-{0:0}, at: touch_wq_lockdep_map+0x26/0x90
but task is already holding lock:
ffff888118a00948 ((wq_completion)nvmet-wq){+.+.}-{0:0}, at: process_one_work+0x53e/0x660
3 locks held by kworker/u192:42/44933:
#0: ffff888118a00948 ((wq_completion)nvmet-wq){+.+.}-{0:0}, at: process_one_work+0x53e/0x660
#1: ffffc9000e6cbe28 ((work_completion)(&queue->release_work)){+.+.}-{0:0}, at: process_one_work+0x1c5/0x660
#2: ffffffff82d4db60 (rcu_read_lock){....}-{1:3}, at: __flush_work+0x62/0x530
Workqueue: nvmet-wq nvmet_rdma_release_queue_work [nvmet_rdma]
Call Trace:
__flush_work+0x268/0x530
nvmet_ctrl_free+0x140/0x310 [nvmet]
nvmet_cq_put+0x74/0x90 [nvmet]
nvmet_rdma_free_queue+0x23/0xe0 [nvmet_rdma]
nvmet_rdma_release_queue_work+0x19/0x50 [nvmet_rdma]
process_one_work+0x206/0x660
worker_thread+0x184/0x320
kthread+0x10c/0x240
ret_from_fork+0x319/0x390
Move async event work to a dedicated nvmet-aen-wq to avoid reentrant
flush on nvmet-wq.
What the EG score is made of (scorer v4.0: the three questions the 0–10 score mixes, published apart · methodology)
The EG score (7.5): severity, escalated by confirmed exploitation. This CVE's 7.5 is its impact severity (EG Severity), not escalated.
- EG Severity
- 7.5 HIGHCVSS-B, impact only: no KEV listing, EPSS or EG-KEV tier raises it.GitHub Security Advisory CVSS
- EG Likelihood
- 0.4% within 30 daysSource: FIRST EPSS (model v2026.06.15, score date 2026-10-27). FIRST's exploitation probability, not an EchelonGraph model.
- Confirmed exploitation
- None on record (CISA KEV, EG-KEV Tier 1)Reported apart from the likelihood: an observed fact, not a probability.
- EG Priority
- SSVC Track at medium mission impactTrack at low or medium mission impact; Attend at high (mission-essential systems).CISA BOD 26-04: 14 days if the affected system is publicly exposed; 60 days if it is not.Each input and its source: the SSVC and BOD 26-04 blocks below.
SSVC (CISA's decision table, applied by EchelonGraph)Track at low or medium mission impact; Attend at high (mission-essential systems).
A fix is available. Apply it within your standard update timelines at low or medium mission impact and sooner than that at high.
Exploitation none (CISA Vulnrichment) · Automatable yes (CISA Vulnrichment) · Technical impact partial (CISA Vulnrichment). All three are CISA's SSVC values (Vulnrichment). EchelonGraph applied CISA's decision table to them; CISA publishes SSVC inputs and the table, not a decision for each CVE. Mission impact is CISA's Mission & Well-being decision point, and only you can judge it. CISA's table makes it high when Mission Prevalence is Essential — the vulnerable component "directly provides capabilities that constitute at least one MEF for at least one entity" (MEF: mission essential function) — or when Public Well-Being Impact is Irreversible: "multiple fatalities are likely", the cyber-physical system "is likely lost or destroyed", "extreme or serious externalities" are imposed on other parties, or social systems such as elections or the financial grid "are destabilized and potentially collapse". CISA's decision table
BOD 26-04 (CISA's remediation timeline, Table 1)14 days if the affected system is publicly exposed; 60 days if it is not.
In CISA KEV no (CISA's KEV catalog) · Automatable yes (CISA Vulnrichment) · Technical impact partial (CISA Vulnrichment). Whether your system is publicly exposed is yours to answer. BOD 26-04 binds US Federal Civilian Executive Branch agencies; for anyone else it is CISA's published timeline, a reference rather than an obligation. The directive · how EchelonGraph applies it